Monday's letters: Change needed

Published: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, November 30, 2012 at 5:24 p.m.

To the editor: The Times-News online forums seem to be dominated by two types of Flat Rock Playhouse naysayers — the “Let ’em starve” people who were out in force at the last commissioners’ meeting, and the “Why change a good thing?” worriers.

The first are ready to put the dagger to the golden goose, while the second express our natural apprehension to change.

There’s a reason that the maxim “Change or die” exists. Any business with the same products, the same floor plan, the same anything except quality will eventually have no business. People’s tastes, needs and expectations change with seasons and generations. Theater, also.

One online commentator pined for the good old small little theater days. But would a still small theater be a true testament to the vision and ability of Robroy Farquar, his wife and son? Did he build a house so fragile that change would weaken it?

The Playhouse’s challenge in an Internet age is how to woo the cybergeneration without losing the earlier theater-goers. A difficult task.

The Playhouse must change and grow, experiment and provoke, or it ceases to fulfill theater’s true mission. The question now is: Can we accept change and grow with them?

Eva L. Ritchey

Hendersonville

All for naught

To the editor: Looking at the big picture of the past election, there was the $250 million man from Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, and the Republican Party with its national organization, campaign fundraising and communications networks.

There was the conservative and Christian part of our society. There was talk radio with its coast-to-coast networks. There were 100 million Americans who own firearms, and there’s the National Rifle Association.

With all the talk, talk, talk, fundraising and national organizations, they were unable to defeat Barack Obama and the communist agenda.

<p>To the editor: The Times-News online forums seem to be dominated by two types of Flat Rock Playhouse naysayers  the Let ’em starve people who were out in force at the last commissioners’ meeting, and the Why change a good thing? worriers.</p><p>The first are ready to put the dagger to the golden goose, while the second express our natural apprehension to change.</p><p>There’s a reason that the maxim Change or die exists. Any business with the same products, the same floor plan, the same anything except quality will eventually have no business. People’s tastes, needs and expectations change with seasons and generations. Theater, also.</p><p>One online commentator pined for the good old small little theater days. But would a still small theater be a true testament to the vision and ability of Robroy Farquar, his wife and son? Did he build a house so fragile that change would weaken it?</p><p>The Playhouse’s challenge in an Internet age is how to woo the cybergeneration without losing the earlier theater-goers. A difficult task.</p><p>The Playhouse must change and grow, experiment and provoke, or it ceases to fulfill theater’s true mission. The question now is: Can we accept change and grow with them?</p><p><em>Eva L. Ritchey</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>All for naught</h3>
<p>To the editor: Looking at the big picture of the past election, there was the $250 million man from Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, and the Republican Party with its national organization, campaign fundraising and communications networks.</p><p>There was the conservative and Christian part of our society. There was talk radio with its coast-to-coast networks. There were 100 million Americans who own firearms, and there’s the National Rifle Association.</p><p>With all the talk, talk, talk, fundraising and national organizations, they were unable to defeat Barack Obama and the communist agenda.</p><p>This is truly pathetic.</p><p><em>Richard Clark</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p>